but the us doesn’t recognise the icc.

Dinner first, though.

Neither does [insert African dictatorship].

Oh, “creative”, huh. Rape can be a form of torture. It’s the exact same sick, sadistic thing.

Why u so obsessed with rape? Jfc.

I never mentioned anything to suggest rape at all and you’re all like, oh, rape rape, rapey rape.

Wtf.

I just gonna kill some fucking nazis. Without fulfilling your sexual fantasy or trauma or whatever the fuck you’re on about of Nazi war crime rape.

OK?

I shine the light where there’s roaches, basically.

None of what you’re saying is original, and past generations of people like you are the reason the blanket prohibitions on genocide, sexual violence and torture had to be committed to paper. Why would I choose to water that down? I pick the thing you don’t want said out loud.

Edit, since you did: Except killing isn’t a war crime, which is what this conversation is about.

And maple syrup to slow down invaders.

You’re fucked.

I never mentioned anything you said

You’re the one inferring something I never implied.

Shine that light on yourself.

Maybe you’ll find something in there.

Now, go play nice with Hitler.

You don’t need to commit war crimes to fight fascists. It just makes you a shitty person.

I never said I would.

Did you?

Oh, wait, no, look at prole and canadaplus, definitely a collaborator because they didn’t say they weren’t, but they definitely are because they like talking about war crimes and rape so much and are defending Nazis instead of defending Canada.

Now, you are a collaborator and rapist because i said you are.

The Kremlin has already declared its support for US annexation of Greenland. Russia already knows the US has military bases in Greenland and both are NATO countries. Russia benefits more from the NATO collapse that would follow so they can freely swing at Europe.

That only works if said by someone who isn’t from the area.

You’re going to have a hard time convincing Canadians living in an occupied country, whose main weapon is being able to hide in plain sight and deceive the enemy, or hop over the border and enact retribution on soft targets, that they must fight fair and just allow themselves to be occupied by the stronger aggressor.

Some war crimes like perfidy and indiscriminate killing will definitely happen in such a situation, and understandably so.

Ah yes, indiscriminate killing of civilians, a famously effective policy that’s going great for Russia right now. Legitimately valuable tactics tend not to be named atrocities in the first place. Only senseless acts of cruelty that make you the bad guy.

Now, if somebody wants to defend the indefensible a third time, you could say, like, guerillas aren’t going to wear uniforms and that’s technically a war crime itself. Sure, but it’s only coming out in a hypothetical future comment because “use of a marked minefield in a graveyard in contravention of article 7, subsection 1c” wasn’t what OP meant, and we all know it. OP meant rape and torture and smashing babies against trees. Maybe just one of the three, or maybe the works.

Yeah, sure, in the event of a US military invasion and occupation, feel free to climb onto the moral high ground and explain to Canadians, who are oppressed and victimized daily by enemy forces, why they should fight back only by the agreed rules laid down by state actors.

I suspect OP meant the kinds of things that Canada was accused of in past wars - like perfidy and murdering POWs - and not, in fact, raping and smashing babies into trees, or whatever the fuck else you’ve decided to imagine they meant. You know, the things that were historically attributed to Canadian troops, which you might know, if you actually based any of your opinion on actual historical fact.

The trees thing was Cambodia of course. Rape and torture were all kinds of people, including The British Empire (AKA Canada).

I’ll let readers decide what what was obviously meant. I’m not sure killing in “creative” ways from further down can be twisted into something more generous, regardless of how much you try.

When people make this comment about Canada and the Geneva Conventions they are referring primarily to Canada’s conduct in WW1 and WW2, and in particular their treatment of POWs (i.e. killing POWs). There may also be reference to events like Canadian soldiers switching cans of food thrown to German soldiers with explosives.

Canada has had other incidents, particularly in Somalia with the airborne, who were disbanded.

These are facts that can be discovered with a little research. The other things you mentioned are things that you may wish to associate with Canada, but unfortunately for you Canada’s war crimes typically involve treatment of POWs and perfidy, not rape and ‘smashing babies against trees’.

And associating Canada to the British Empire is a pretty hamfisted way to try to implicate Canada in the colonial and imperial adventures of the British Empire that spans centuries and predates her.

Dare you! Triple doggy dare you tbh

:: Flashbacks of the Boston Molasses Disaster ::

Literally the original comment of this thread:

I’m gonna give Canada a free pass on any war crimes they commit this time